Drivers, here are the words you've all been waiting to hear: The Pulaski Skyway is open.

And two days early, no less!

The New Jersey Department of Transportation had said the spans that make up the Skyway would reopen by Monday, but drivers were overjoyed and even a bit confused Saturday when they found they could again travel on its lanes.

Pulaski Skyway reopens to two-way traffic marking a major milestone as new deck is complete

Rehabilitation project continues with substructure and ramp work

(Trenton) -New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) officials today announced that the northbound lanes on the Pulaski Skyway are scheduled to be reopened by Monday, July 2 returning two-way traffic to the iconic bridge.

“Rehabilitating an 85-year-old structure that is 3.5 miles long is a massive undertaking, and the completion of the redecking portion of this project marks a major milestone, but there is still more work to do,” NJDOT Commissioner Diane Gutierrez-Scaccetti said. “Greater deterioration of steel required more extensive repairs than expected, and combined with some of the worst winter weather in New Jersey history, this portion of the 11-contract project took longer than originally anticipated. We appreciate the public’s patience while these necessary repairs were made and traffic was rerouted. The good news is the innovative materials and methods used to rehabilitate the Skyway mean this deck will last for decades to come.”

Frinjc wrote:The north side pavement and pitch seemed a little off driving there this morning.. I guess it was a first impression. Once it reopens I hope they keep 78 fully open as it is, because we will still have to wait until the end of the work on 139, with one lane traffic, so the pulaski will be backed up as in the good ol' days.

I was pleasantly surprised when I saw cars driving southbound on the north-side lanes this past weekend, as it hopefully DOES mean the road will be fully re-opening soon!

As for 139, does anyone have any idea when that will be completed? The "official site" says it was to have been completed in 2017.

The north side pavement and pitch seemed a little off driving there this morning.. I guess it was a first impression. Once it reopens I hope they keep 78 fully open as it is, because we will still have to wait until the end of the work on 139, with one lane traffic, so the pulaski will be backed up as in the good ol' days.

This evening I drove on the north side of the bridge, which was closed due to work, while the south side remained open to traffic for months on end. The south side was closed today, presumably for final touch up work.

The point > I think the bridge will be completely open in both directions real soon.

The $1 billion Pulaski Skyway rehabilitation project that's left detoured drivers grinding their teeth for the last four years is will be reopened in the next few weeks, state DOT officials said.

Motorists will get their first chance to drive on the new southbound lanes this weekend when traffic is shifted from the new northbound lanes so crews can remove temporary guardrails, do minor paving, and other work, said Stephen Schapiro, a DOT spokesman. The Skyway has been closed to northbound traffic since April 2104.

Bike_Lane wrote:What's more amazing is that it's taking 8 years to replace the Wittpenn Bridge.

I pretty sure there was a plan to build alongside the wittpenn bridge. Instead they chose to rebuild. So after 10 yrs of additional traffic and road closings we will be left with only the same ways in and out of Jersey city. In the end traffic congestion will be as it was before.

The retaining walls were not part of the original $1 billion Skyway rehabilitation project, said Stephen Schapiro, an NJDOT spokesman.

"If they are not reconstructed now, they would need replacing in a few years, resulting in future closures, detours, and inconvenience to motorists," Schapiro said. "This work is expected to be completed next spring, at which time the Skyway will reopen to two-way traffic."

Well at least this is additional work and not the original project being delayed even more.

Frinjc wrote:Too bad, they were making great progress.. but I am not surprised looking at 139, if this is the section just before passing JFK it looks like there is indeed quite a bit of structural consolidation to be done there. The plus side is that thereafter we will be DONE!

When the decking was removed near Central Ave I got a good look at the exposed I-beams. Sunlight was coming through thousands of little pinholes in the steel. That road was in really, really bad shape. I guess years of salt water leaching through the concrete ate away the steel.

Too bad, they were making great progress.. but I am not surprised looking at 139, if this is the section just before passing JFK it looks like there is indeed quite a bit of structural consolidation to be done there. The plus side is that thereafter we will be DONE!

Full reopening of Pulaski Skyway lanes pushed back a year

Reopening all lanes of the Pulaski Skywayto traffic in both directions has been pushed back to next summer, state officials said.

Work is expected to be completed by summer 2017 to finish the last half-mile of bridge deck on the northbound lanes and 3.5 miles on southbound lanes, said Stephen Schapiro, state Department of Transportation spokesman.

Actually, this is half true. Parts of the northbound side are finished. Right now they have the traffic merging over to the northbound lanes then back to the southbound then once again back to the northbound right before you get off.

It's a dangerous traffic pattern and an accident waiting to happen with how fast people drive on there.

Hopefully they will fix the 3 major metal plates on the road that are still a lot of wear and tear on the car.

Since there's only 3 now, other drivers either knowingly or unknowingly want to drive over them at ridiculous speeds.

Nothin for nothing, I have been driving the Pulaski from JC to Newark for many a day for the past 3 years.I have to say the workers are consistently out there, good weather or not. The covered roadway has made a lot of progress. I hope they are addressing the structural issues of the bridge. I cannot say as I do not knowfor sure, but the workers have been out there.

mastablasta wrote:When they started work on the Pulaski Skyway, they said it would take two years. Well, I think that's what they said. Anyway, I drove over it this morning and it doesn't even look like they are even close to finishing the first half let alone start the other lanes. It also looked there there were only about 12 people working on my drive across the entire span around 9:45am. Of those 12, it looked like only three were actually working. Does anyone know when this will be completed?

Just an FYI for all the drivers out there. The Pulaski Skyway will be totally closed this weekend. They finished the side they were rebuilding and are setting up a new traffic pattern to divert traffic to other side of the road.

When they started work on the Pulaski Skyway, they said it would take two years. Well, I think that's what they said. Anyway, I drove over it this morning and it doesn't even look like they are even close to finishing the first half let alone start the other lanes. It also looked there there were only about 12 people working on my drive across the entire span around 9:45am. Of those 12, it looked like only three were actually working. Does anyone know when this will be completed?

Yes I have seen for 139, I drive there pretty much every day. In addition to the bridges by Baldwin, the western end just before the exit to Tonnele and 280, where many structures criss cross each others has not been touched, I am talking especially of the section with that big transversal beam that is supported on concrete that is falling appart. Post the exits yes they have done a good job at reconstructing the steel beams.

What about the major bridges of the skyway? It seems like these are the major components left prior to resurfacing/reopening, the work has been progressing nicely up to that point.

They've already replaced every single support that spans 139. They knocked out all the crossings except Baldwin and Palisades. Once the remainder of the crossings are completely rebuilt, Baldwin and Palisades will get the treatment.

They're really doing a fantastic job on this work. The schedule is about as close to perfect as a project of this size can get. Last winter was an absolute nightmare as far as construction goes. A few months behind is just fine to me.

Have people noticed how they seem to have worked on the skyway but none of the bridges that support it? It is a similar story with 139, none of the bridges at Baldwin etc have been touched. These are the structurally supporting elements and it does not look like they are doing anything there certainly when on the skyway.

Remember when this project was first announced and it was going to take four to five years? Two or so years for each direction. Turns out its six years now (and traffic will flow south-bound only for the length of the project):

State transportation officials say work to install a new bridge deck on the Pulaski Skyway is past the halfway point, although a planned swap of southbound traffic to new pavement on the northbound lanes is delayed.

"The overall project is still on schedule and expected to be completed in 2020," said Stephen Schapiro, an NJDOT spokesman, in response to questions about an NBC News 4 report about delays pushing the project back. "The (bridge deck) project is more than halfway done, as the majority of the northbound side is completed and there has been a lot of work done underneath the southbound lanes."

Installing the new bridge deck is probably the most visible of 10 phases of the project to drivers. It required closing the northbound lanes in April 2014.

That part of the massive $1 billion project is several months behind schedule, which is the planned switch of southbound traffic to the newly installed bridge deck on the northbound lanes. That change was supposed to happen by the end of 2015, to allow crews to replace the bridge deck on the southbound side of the Skyway.

TRENTON — The state attorney general’s office has asked the Department of Transportation to review whether a Chinese firm properly disclosed its investors before the agency awarded it a $123 million contract to rebuild portions of the Pulaski Skyway, The Star-Ledger has learned.

The request was prompted by a New Jersey-based competitor — Conti Group — which lost out on the contract and failed to get it overturned after alleging the winning bidder CCA Civil has prohibited ties to Iran’s energy sector.

After losing in administrative and legal hearings, Conti now says CCA Civil should be disqualified for failing to disclose its string of investors in pre-bidding applications.

CCA purposely failed to disclose its investors to avoid revealing its strong ties to the Chinese government and that one of its investors is on a list of companies banned from doing business in New Jersey because of its ties to Iran’s energy sector, Conti argues in July 17 briefing sent to the state attorney general’s office and obtained by The Star-Ledger.

New Jersey is among a growing number of states that ban any company — including its parent companies and subsidiaries — that has financial interests in Iran’s energy sector from public contracts.

"Now that the DOT has been made aware of the misrepresentations and omissions of CCA, in order to ensure that New Jersey law is followed, CCA’s bid must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Conti," the firm’s attorney argues. "This was clearly done to conceal violations of the State Iran Act."

Lee Moore, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, confirmed the office received the letter and referred the matter to the DOT for the agency’s opinion. DOT spokesman Joe Dee declined to comment for this report.

CCA did not respond to phone calls or emails seeking comment, and neither did the firm’s attorney, Michael Guiffre, of Patton Boggs. Officials at Conti Group declined to comment.

A reversal by the DOT would be a stunning blow to CCA, a major contractor in the region. The company, based in Jersey City, is part of a joint venture rebuilding the Alexander Hamilton Bridge between Manhattan and the Bronx, and is one of the bidders vying to rebuild the Central Terminal Building at La Guardia Airport. It worked on New York City’s No. 7 subway line extension and constructed platforms for the train station at the new Yankee Stadium.

State law requires any company awarded a contract to disclose all investors with at least a 10 percent interest. The disclosures apply not only to the bidder but also to its parent companies. In pre-qualification forms, CCA Civil told the DOT it’s a wholly owned subsidiary of CSEC Holding. The firm also disclosed two subsidiaries of the parent holding company.

But in a separate letter to the DOT on June 10, CCA Civil detailed a much more elaborate corporate structure, Conti alleges. CCA said its parent company is wholly owned by another firm, China State Engineering Construction Corporation Ltd., a publicly-traded company whose major stockholder is China State Engineering Construction Corporation.

The company did not disclose those other relationships on the pre-bidding forms, records show.

The recent charge comes after Conti failed to convince the DOT and the attorney general’s office that one of the CCA’s parent companies includes an investor with prohibited financial ties to Iran.

Conti argued that one of the investment partners includes China National Petroleum, a state-owned company that is among 41 firms on the state’s banned list. More broadly, Conti, the runner-up in the bids, also raised concerns about any state-owned Chinese company getting public contracts, given the country’s financial ties to Iran.

In legal briefs and filings to the Department of Transportation, CCA Civil denied claims that it is directly owned and controlled by the Chinese government or that it has any corporate links to companies with investments in Iran. The company argues that Conti is a sore loser that has resorted to "China bashing" to overturn the award.

Lawyers for CCA argue the implications of Conti’s argument is "that each and every business that is directly or indirectly owned by the Chinese government is barred from government contracting." Only Congress can enact such restrictions or empower states to do the same, they said.